SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

KERALA HIGH COURT
A. Badharudeen, J.
Dr. V.K. Sulochana – Petitioner
versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
Crl. MC No.2310 of 2022
Decided on 4.2.2025

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:K.T. Bosco and P. Darly John, Advocates
For the Respondent: Jibu T. S., PP

IMPORTANT POINTS
Prompt and Proper Reporting – Prompt and proper reporting of the commission of offence under the POCSO Act is of utmost importance and its failure on coming to know about the commission of any offence under the Act would defeat the very purpose and object of the Act.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 450 and 376 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Sections 4(1) read with Sections 3(a), 6(ii) read with 5(j)(ii) – Quashment of Proceedings – On the ground of Non-timely reporting of crime / Knowledge of Commission of Offence – On facts, the prompt and proper reporting of the commission of offence under the POCSO Act is of utmost importance and its failure on coming to know about the commission of any offence under the Act would defeat the very purpose and object of the Act. No doubt, medical examination of the victim as also the accused would give many important clues in a case that falls under the POCSO Act. Therefore, timely reporting is inevitable to start the investigation without much delay, including medical examination of the victim, in time. At the same time, when evaluating the materials of the prosecution in order to see whether there was willful or deliberate omission on the part of the doctor, the facts of each case should be evaluated to see whether there was deliberate or intentional omission, so as to fasten criminal culpability upon the doctor.

Held: In the instant case, the minor victim was first treated by Dr. Indu M.R., Aswini Hospital, on 31.05.2021 and as per her statement she reported the same as MLC on 03.06.2021 and accordingly the CMO of the hospital reported the same to the Police. On 04.06.2021, while the victim was undergoing treatment at GEM Hospital, under the management of the petitioner herein, her statement was recorded and crime was registered. It is true that, the prosecution records no way suggest that, though the petitioner started treating the victim from 02.06.2021 and continued the same till 04.06.2021, she had taken any steps to report the same to the Police. But, on 04.06.2021, the Police reached the hospital, while the victim was under the treatment of the petitioner and the crime was registered.

When the initial doctor, who treated or had occasion to attend the victim, on getting knowledge regarding commission of the offence under the POCSO Act, reports the same without much delay and on the basis of the same crime also registered, criminal prosecution against the doctor or doctors, who subsequently treated the same victim for the offence under Section 21 read with 19(1) of the POCSO Act, is an abuse of process of court, since the doctor who initially treated the victim already informed the same to the Police and crime was also registered. No doubt, such prosecution shall be avoided.

Thus, there is no deliberate omission on the part of the petitioner in reporting the crime, in the facts discussed – The criminal prosecution as against the petitioner in this crime, alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 21 read with 19(1) of the POCSO Act is unwarranted and without any justification, prima facie. [Paras 5 to 15]

Result: Petition allowed.

ORDER

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure.A1 Final Report in Crime No.884/2021 of Ollur Police Station, Thrissur, now pending as S.C. No.929/2021 on the files of the Special Court for the trial of cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act [hereinafter referred as ‘POCSO Act’ for short] (1st Additional District and Sessions Court), Thrissur. The petitioner herein is the 3rd accused in the above case.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, in detail. Perused the Final Report and the decisions placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

3. In this matter, the prosecution allegation is that, at about 13.30 hours on a day in the last week of January, 2021, the 1st accused trespassed upon the residence of the minor victim, aged 17 years and subjected her to sexual intercourse and as a result of the same, the minor victim became pregnant. On this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 450 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 4(1) read with 3(a), 6(ii) read with 5(j)(ii) of the POCSO Act, as against the 1st accused.

4. The prosecution allegation against the petitioner, who is the 3rd accused and the mother of the victim, who the 2nd accused is that, they failed to report the crime to the Police as provided under Section 19 of the POCSO Act and thereby they committed the offence punishable under Section 21 read with 19(1) of the POCSO Act.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued to substantiate that the petitioner/3rd accused is absolutely innocent of the allegations and there was no deliberate omission on the part of the doctor to inform the crime to the Police. In this connection it is submitted that, as per the statement given by the victim, it was stated that, she met Dr.Indu M.R. of Aswini Hospital, Thrissur, when there was no menstruation for a period of five months and the doctor advised to do scan examination. On scan examination, it was found that the victim was four months pregnant and accordingly, she was directed to go to Government Medical College Hospital and treat accordingly. In tune with the statement given by the victim, the learned counsel read out the statement given by Dr.Indu M.R., Aswini Hospital, Thrissur. In the statement of Dr.Indu M.R., she stated that she attended the minor victim and found that the she was pregnant and accordingly, she was sent to Government Medical College Hospital, Thrissur, for further treatment. The doctor’s statement would show further that, since she found the same as MLC, it was reported on 03.06.2021 and the CMO of the hospital forwarded the same on 04.06.2021 to the Police. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, in this matter, the FIR was registered on 04.06.2021 and the same would reveal that the First Information Statement of the victim was recorded while she was undergoing treatment at GEM Hospital, Thrissur, where the petitioner herein treated her. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the pregnancy of the victim was first noticed by Dr.Indu M.R. on 31.05.2021 and on noticing the pregnancy of the minor victim, the doctor reported the same as MLC on 03.06.2021 and the CMO of the hospital forwarded the same on 04.06.2021 to the Police and the FIR was registered on 04.06.2021 itself. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner further that, though Dr.Indu M.R. advised the minor victim to have further treatment at Government Medical College, Thrissur, the victim opted her treatment at GEM Hospital, Thrissur, when there occurred bleeding and for the first time the petitioner had occasion to meet the victim was only on 02.06.2021 and accordingly she was given treatment and the pregnancy got aborted, to save the life of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top